The Harsh Realities of Sweatshops: Balancing Economic Necessity and Workers Rights

Abstract

First, Kristof knows that the reader is dissatisfied with his arguments regarding sweatshops. By this, he acknowledges clearly saying so. He counters the dissatisfaction by posing a question to the disgruntled reader on what remedies they offer on the table for people in such countries that are unstable and insecure that no investors want to risk their investment. Workers get paid less money in the sweatshop than they should The author argues that sweatshops are the only practical hope for kids who dropped out of school because there is practically no other work that kids of a particular age can do. As Kristof puts it, the kids should be in school, and certain third-world countries have quite many school dropouts with no hope of re-joining. Most work would be hard for such an age, and therefore, as the author puts it, it is more comfortable, and according to a certain age, the money comes easy and is adequate(Kristof, 2002). Workers work harder than they should Most of these workers are in the first step on life's escalator and probably have no skills whatsoever on anything else that they could do better. Bearing this in mind, working here and getting the little they get could be better than sitting and waiting for relief from the United Nations. If the United Nations cuts the funds, where would these families feed? Furthermore, most of these people are widows, and the little they get would benefit their own and help in the growth of their countries (Kristof, 2002). Workers hate work in sweatshops. It is true that the workers in the sweatshops are doing so because of fewer alternatives and would want better-paying jobs. But the author states that there are no better alternatives because no potential investor feels confident...